13 ms·

I can't. There are accidents where even seconds matter and the effects of the jamming can mean the difference between life and death or even simply a shift in

I can't. There are accidents where even seconds matter and the effects of the jamming can mean the difference between life and death or even simply a shift in the a victim's odds. Or consider emergency services whose radios were affected: maybe paramedics were radioing in status updates to a hospital, or perhaps police officers were in the middle of receiving an Amber alert. Or, imagine that he's injured in an accident himself. He, and anyone else potentially injured in such an accident, are potentially at risk because people can't notify 911. If he's lucky, he's able to turn it off. If he's unlucky, and is incapacitated or otherwise unable to turn it off, well, that's quite the problem now, isn't it? I hate dreaming up hypotheticals, but this story practically demands it. His actions were no less selfish than someone else's texting while driving.

Jtsummers 13y ago
A friend of mine used to rant about cellphones in theaters, and thought theaters should install jammers (as in, he was actually surprised that none had done this yet). The fact is, they're a primary communication device for many people. Who knows when you might receive a call that you have to take (for certain jobs or with situations concerning family or friends), or when you need to make a phone call (see the Aurora shooting or the recent one in FL for violent examples, but even a heart attack or some other medical emergency). Jammers just aren't a good idea for 99.999% of the situations people suggest using them.
- vacri 13y ago
  If it's known that the theatre is a phone dead zone, you can step outside the theatre and make the call. If someone's having a heart attack, you have a whole theatre full of people that you can pull resources from. A car driving around is a secret dead zone that punishes you for being nearby, even if you're not transgressing any social norms or traffic laws. Sitting on a park bench nearby? Hell, even being a passenger in a vehicle? That's the problem - he's being an indiscriminate vigilante.
  - stevekinney 13y ago
    I think the point was that if a theatre installed jammers, then patrons could not receive calls. Yea, I get that no one wants to overhear someone having a long chat with their significant other right as the plot line thickens, but a doctor on call or a parent who's kid is just got hurt at the baby sitter might appreciate being able to receive a call or text while their phone is on silent. They can then step out of the theatre in order to take the call or call back. That said, I totally agree with you on your main point. This is often a counter argument when people suggest that mobile devices should be disabled when the car is in motion (which isn't necessarily the same thing as jamming). Often, when I'm driving, my wife is looking up directions or letting a family member know that we're near.
    - Jtsummers 13y ago
      Thanks, receiving calls is really the big one for me. I know a lot of people working in fields requiring them to be on call 24x7 unless they're on leave. A 2 hour delay in calling back is just barely tolerable for most of them, and unacceptable for some. It'd suck to have to stop enjoying something outside a couple vacations a year because some people are inconsiderate and other people can't tune them out. That said, making calls to emergency services, if you have to run outside to make that call, you've lost 30 seconds or a couple minutes. And you can't follow their directions in aiding the person because you're outside, and the victim(s) are inside. That's assuming it's not an attacker who would prevent you from leaving in the first place.
      - vacri 13y ago
        That's assuming it's not an attacker who would prevent you from leaving in the first place. Is this really such a pandemic in the US these days?
        Jtsummers 13y ago
        Theater shootings and mass shootings, not really. But shootings do happen, sometimes over the dumbest crap, and by people you wouldn't expect ([EDIT: retired] police officer in FL in a theater, a veteran shot a woman at a gas station here in GA [1]). Shootings aren't nearly common enough, though, to justify a ban on jammers. But emergency situations do come up, especially in a country of 300 million people and some 40k theaters [2], each with several screens. It just strikes me as irresponsible and unnecessary to insist on such a hardline ban for the sake of shutting out a few rude jerks. [1] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/05/woman-killed-gas-station/1748949/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/05/woman-k... [2] http://chartsbin.com/view/32k http://chartsbin.com/view/32k -- I'm assuming this is accurate
- throwaway0010 13y ago
  But some theaters DO block cellphones -- by encasing the venue in a faraday cage. It's possible to buy paint with metallic bits to block radio. Broadcasting to jam is illegal. It is not illegal to build a room in which cellphones do not work, nor should it be.
  - Jtsummers 13y ago
    I'll make the claim that I've not noticed reception issues in theaters in at least the last 5 years. My use-case is typically texting (usually with the other members of my group, things like "Hey, I'm on the 5th row up") though, but even then I usually see 2+ bars, sufficient for voice calls. My apartment has worse reception than that (I can make calls from my sunroom, nowhere else).
    - neil1 13y ago
      You can buy and install a cellphone extender for your house.
      - thrownaway2424 13y ago
        Yes, it's a true fact that you can pay money for the privilege of extending the cell phone provider's network, while also paying the backhaul the cell phone company's traffic over your internet link, while also paying the cell phone for their "service" that you have to personally install and operate. I have no idea why people think this is an acceptable scenario.
        wtracy 13y ago
        The providers apparently assume that you're already paying for "unlimited" internet. Also, these access points pair with your device and don't provide bandwidth to other random devices, so at least you're not providing free backhaul for random passersby.
        tsomctl 13y ago
        There are other ones which are just a simple amplifier, not a whole base station. There's one antennae on the outside, another smaller one on the inside, and whatever signal it picks up one one antennae, it retransmits on the other with more power. Obviously the antennaes are directional so you don't get feedback, and there might be some more complicated filtering too.
- ryandrake 13y ago
  Somehow, back before cell phones were invented, we all miraculously managed to live our lives without having constant access to a telephone. If you needed to call someone, you stepped away from whatever you were doing and called them. If Aunt Mabel had a heart attack, you'd find out about it, just not 500ms after it happened. If someone wasn't happy with how you filled out your TPS report at work, you'd go into the office in the morning and fix it.
  - lotu 13y ago
    The problem is we are dismantling our land line network. So if you don't have cell phone there might not by any phone in the building that works. Next what about emergency workers? They need to be able to be contacted. Or what about people on call for their jobs? All of these things could be blocked by jammers and the idea that we survived once without it unconvincing we survived once without vacancies and antibiotics too.
    - frandroid 13y ago
      Huh? Where are "we" dismantling our landline network?
      - superuser2 13y ago
        Are you being deliberately obtuse? Every payphone I've ever seen in my lifetime has been removed.
        DigitalJack 13y ago
        There are usually a couple near grocery stores where I live.
        frandroid 12y ago
        Payphones are endpoints, the network is much more than that. Except for the few examples listed in another answer, most of the infrastructure is still intact, i.e. you can get a landline in your home if you want one.
- mentalhealth 13y ago
  Back in the day (I haven't been in a while, unfortunately, so I don't know the current status), at nicer theatres and at the opera, they had a service available for emergency personnel (doctors, et cetera) where they'd take your pager, put a tag with your seat number on it (and also typically you'd be seated on an aisle), and they come fetch you if your pager went off. Worked great with minimal disruption to patrons... though the definition of "emergency" was fairly narrow, and this likely wouldn't work if patrons were insisting on it for family phone calls and so on.
  - mhb 13y ago
    It would work fine if this was a paid service. People could decide what "emergency" was worth being notified about. That would also give the theater some incentive to enforce a no-device policy.
yaddayadda 13y ago
Not a hypothetical for me. More than a few years ago, I was a manager at a hotel. As such there were several days each month when I had the emergency pager (yep, pager). The only time I ever got a 911 on the darn thing was while I was in the middle of a movie. I've never booked out of a movie theater so fast! I called back to the hotel to find out a fire alarm in a crawl space had triggered. In the end it was just a loose wire in the actual alarm system, but obviously we didn't know it at the time. And thankfully, the movie staff had seen me in my haste, so when I returned several hours later, they were kind enough to let me watch the next showing of the movie for free.
kosievdmerwe 13y ago
I imagine whoever has a jammer can be hit with manslaughter charges in the case someone dies. Or at least something like reckless endangerment.
prof_hobart 13y ago
I could be wrong, but I think you're misunderstanding incision's comment. The way I'm reading it, he's not arguing with the fact that having a jammer operating in the guy's is pretty idiotic. What I think he's saying is that he's got sympathy for what drove the guy to go to these idiotic lengths - the fact that a large number of drivers give pretty much no thought to safety by using their phones when they drive. On my daily 5 minute walk from the bus to work, I will typically see upwards of a dozen drivers staring at their phones, presumably either reading or writing a message, whilst they are moving - ranging from people inching along in slow moving traffic in places that pedestrians could easily (and legally) be crossing, to ones doing 30mph+ in free flowing traffic or even pulling away from the lights based presumably on nothing more than seeing out of the corner of their eye that the car in front has started moving. I've fairly regularly seen cars meandering quite a long way through red lights simply because the driver was clearly paying no attention to what was happening on the road in front of them.

Jtsummers 13y ago

A friend of mine used to rant about cellphones in theaters, and thought theaters should install jammers (as in, he was actually surprised that none had done this yet). The fact is, they're a primary communication device for many people. Who knows when you might receive a call that you have to take (for certain jobs or with situations concerning family or friends), or when you need to make a phone call (see the Aurora shooting or the recent one in FL for violent examples, but even a heart attack or some other medical emergency). Jammers just aren't a good idea for 99.999% of the situations people suggest using them.

vacri 13y ago
If it's known that the theatre is a phone dead zone, you can step outside the theatre and make the call. If someone's having a heart attack, you have a whole theatre full of people that you can pull resources from. A car driving around is a secret dead zone that punishes you for being nearby, even if you're not transgressing any social norms or traffic laws. Sitting on a park bench nearby? Hell, even being a passenger in a vehicle? That's the problem - he's being an indiscriminate vigilante.
- stevekinney 13y ago
  I think the point was that if a theatre installed jammers, then patrons could not receive calls. Yea, I get that no one wants to overhear someone having a long chat with their significant other right as the plot line thickens, but a doctor on call or a parent who's kid is just got hurt at the baby sitter might appreciate being able to receive a call or text while their phone is on silent. They can then step out of the theatre in order to take the call or call back. That said, I totally agree with you on your main point. This is often a counter argument when people suggest that mobile devices should be disabled when the car is in motion (which isn't necessarily the same thing as jamming). Often, when I'm driving, my wife is looking up directions or letting a family member know that we're near.
  - Jtsummers 13y ago
    Thanks, receiving calls is really the big one for me. I know a lot of people working in fields requiring them to be on call 24x7 unless they're on leave. A 2 hour delay in calling back is just barely tolerable for most of them, and unacceptable for some. It'd suck to have to stop enjoying something outside a couple vacations a year because some people are inconsiderate and other people can't tune them out. That said, making calls to emergency services, if you have to run outside to make that call, you've lost 30 seconds or a couple minutes. And you can't follow their directions in aiding the person because you're outside, and the victim(s) are inside. That's assuming it's not an attacker who would prevent you from leaving in the first place.
    - vacri 13y ago
      That's assuming it's not an attacker who would prevent you from leaving in the first place. Is this really such a pandemic in the US these days?
      - Jtsummers 13y ago
        Theater shootings and mass shootings, not really. But shootings do happen, sometimes over the dumbest crap, and by people you wouldn't expect ([EDIT: retired] police officer in FL in a theater, a veteran shot a woman at a gas station here in GA [1]). Shootings aren't nearly common enough, though, to justify a ban on jammers. But emergency situations do come up, especially in a country of 300 million people and some 40k theaters [2], each with several screens. It just strikes me as irresponsible and unnecessary to insist on such a hardline ban for the sake of shutting out a few rude jerks. [1] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/05/woman-killed-gas-station/1748949/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/05/woman-k... [2] http://chartsbin.com/view/32k http://chartsbin.com/view/32k -- I'm assuming this is accurate
throwaway0010 13y ago
But some theaters DO block cellphones -- by encasing the venue in a faraday cage. It's possible to buy paint with metallic bits to block radio. Broadcasting to jam is illegal. It is not illegal to build a room in which cellphones do not work, nor should it be.
- Jtsummers 13y ago
  I'll make the claim that I've not noticed reception issues in theaters in at least the last 5 years. My use-case is typically texting (usually with the other members of my group, things like "Hey, I'm on the 5th row up") though, but even then I usually see 2+ bars, sufficient for voice calls. My apartment has worse reception than that (I can make calls from my sunroom, nowhere else).
  - neil1 13y ago
    You can buy and install a cellphone extender for your house.
    - thrownaway2424 13y ago
      Yes, it's a true fact that you can pay money for the privilege of extending the cell phone provider's network, while also paying the backhaul the cell phone company's traffic over your internet link, while also paying the cell phone for their "service" that you have to personally install and operate. I have no idea why people think this is an acceptable scenario.
      - wtracy 13y ago
        The providers apparently assume that you're already paying for "unlimited" internet. Also, these access points pair with your device and don't provide bandwidth to other random devices, so at least you're not providing free backhaul for random passersby.
      - tsomctl 13y ago
        There are other ones which are just a simple amplifier, not a whole base station. There's one antennae on the outside, another smaller one on the inside, and whatever signal it picks up one one antennae, it retransmits on the other with more power. Obviously the antennaes are directional so you don't get feedback, and there might be some more complicated filtering too.
ryandrake 13y ago
Somehow, back before cell phones were invented, we all miraculously managed to live our lives without having constant access to a telephone. If you needed to call someone, you stepped away from whatever you were doing and called them. If Aunt Mabel had a heart attack, you'd find out about it, just not 500ms after it happened. If someone wasn't happy with how you filled out your TPS report at work, you'd go into the office in the morning and fix it.
- lotu 13y ago
  The problem is we are dismantling our land line network. So if you don't have cell phone there might not by any phone in the building that works. Next what about emergency workers? They need to be able to be contacted. Or what about people on call for their jobs? All of these things could be blocked by jammers and the idea that we survived once without it unconvincing we survived once without vacancies and antibiotics too.
  - frandroid 13y ago
    Huh? Where are "we" dismantling our landline network?
    - superuser2 13y ago
      Are you being deliberately obtuse? Every payphone I've ever seen in my lifetime has been removed.
      - DigitalJack 13y ago
        There are usually a couple near grocery stores where I live.
      - frandroid 12y ago
        Payphones are endpoints, the network is much more than that. Except for the few examples listed in another answer, most of the infrastructure is still intact, i.e. you can get a landline in your home if you want one.
mentalhealth 13y ago
Back in the day (I haven't been in a while, unfortunately, so I don't know the current status), at nicer theatres and at the opera, they had a service available for emergency personnel (doctors, et cetera) where they'd take your pager, put a tag with your seat number on it (and also typically you'd be seated on an aisle), and they come fetch you if your pager went off. Worked great with minimal disruption to patrons... though the definition of "emergency" was fairly narrow, and this likely wouldn't work if patrons were insisting on it for family phone calls and so on.
- mhb 13y ago
  It would work fine if this was a paid service. People could decide what "emergency" was worth being notified about. That would also give the theater some incentive to enforce a no-device policy.

yaddayadda 13y ago

Not a hypothetical for me. More than a few years ago, I was a manager at a hotel. As such there were several days each month when I had the emergency pager (yep, pager). The only time I ever got a 911 on the darn thing was while I was in the middle of a movie. I've never booked out of a movie theater so fast! I called back to the hotel to find out a fire alarm in a crawl space had triggered. In the end it was just a loose wire in the actual alarm system, but obviously we didn't know it at the time. And thankfully, the movie staff had seen me in my haste, so when I returned several hours later, they were kind enough to let me watch the next showing of the movie for free.

kosievdmerwe 13y ago

I imagine whoever has a jammer can be hit with manslaughter charges in the case someone dies. Or at least something like reckless endangerment.

prof_hobart 13y ago

I could be wrong, but I think you're misunderstanding incision's comment. The way I'm reading it, he's not arguing with the fact that having a jammer operating in the guy's is pretty idiotic. What I think he's saying is that he's got sympathy for what drove the guy to go to these idiotic lengths - the fact that a large number of drivers give pretty much no thought to safety by using their phones when they drive. On my daily 5 minute walk from the bus to work, I will typically see upwards of a dozen drivers staring at their phones, presumably either reading or writing a message, whilst they are moving - ranging from people inching along in slow moving traffic in places that pedestrians could easily (and legally) be crossing, to ones doing 30mph+ in free flowing traffic or even pulling away from the lights based presumably on nothing more than seeing out of the corner of their eye that the car in front has started moving. I've fairly regularly seen cars meandering quite a long way through red lights simply because the driver was clearly paying no attention to what was happening on the road in front of them.